http://home.insightbb.com/html-jsp/phot ... onID=30256
http://home.insightbb.com/html-jsp/phot ... onID=30256
Suspension systems can be purchased 3 ways:
A-arms only. $499.00
(Ball Joints & Rod Ends purchased separately)
A-arms w/Ball Joints, Rod Ends & Bushings. $789.00
A-arms w/Ball Joints, Rod Ends, Bushings & Bolt-on Long Travel Upper Brackets. $919.00
E-mail :
tomhall@insightbb.com
From Yoda:
Here are some answers to various posts over the last few days:
Tire Size – like Hoser, I'd recommend stock tires and wheels. Larger ones transmit more impact back through the steering wheel because the wheels have higher leverage ratios relative to stock. Smaller wheels tend to get swallowed in holes and have less sidewall to soak up impacts so the shocks have to do a lot more work. Wider tires with bigger contact area take more work to turn and hold an unstable line. It all comes down to the kind of riding you plan to do.
Scub or Scrub Angle – Caster angle change as the a-arm system travels through its stroke. The pivot points on the frame are not altered by just adding the longer arms. Additional stroke from longer shocks can introduce added scrub, but the Pilot A-arm system is a relatively square 4 bar link arrangement so you would not expect to see major increase. I ran the arms up and down without shocks several times to review clearance issues and did not notice any major variation – maybe a few degrees. I will plan to measure the full range next time I set a front end up on a frame.
Bump steer concern - I don't think extending the A-arms and tie rods outboard 2" will affect the FL400's tendency to bump steer with any degree of significance. The geometric relationship between the tie rods and A-arms that affects bump steer is established in design by their relative connections to the steering knuckle. The steering knuckle is the forging that the wheel spindle, brake backing plate, tie rod and ball joints bolt up to. Extending the a-arms does not change that relationship. My big concern is how radically toe changes through the stroke and I don't know if both issues are collectively are being considered bump steer. Even a stock Pilot shows a significant toe-in at full shock extension compared to full shock compression where the front end is toed-out. This is because the a-arms and tie rods don't share the same pivot points, but have to run through a similar arc. The way to deal with this is to establish a good stock toe setting at the expected running ride height. Since there are many different weight riders, shock, spring and a-arm configurations, establishing a uniform way to set toe is difficult. I worked through a camber, caster and toe setting procedure on both of Stoneman's Pilots which, I think, worked quite well. Those Pilots are in Georgia now being tested and if we get favorable results, I'll share the process.
Rear system - I have nothing in development as of yet, but recognize there is a need. A lot depends on how well received this project is. In my observation, the rear could use stiffer springs, less rebound damping and longer travel.
Caster and Camber set up tricks - As I mentioned above, I worked up an alignment process and used it on both of Stoneman's Pilots. We raced one at the Harris Metals race and it tracked very straight even at high speeds on rough terrain – that Pilot won the race too. The other Pilot is being tested this week at Durhamtown and I'll work with Stoneman to report on that set up soon.
Also, thanks for the comments regarding this type of front end set up and the history too. I'll look forward to reading your comments after the a-arms get run through the wringer.
Bump steer kit – not required. See my comments to Adnoh and Hoser's comments from 12/24 about bump steer. This set up is very close to what Hoser and Stoneman have been using for quite some time. They are, however, heavier duty, more repeatable in construction and can be used with a number of different long or standard travel shock absorbers.
Tie rods hitting the frame – This is the big design dilemma for getting extra travel in the front end of a Pilot. Try to bolt an 18” long shock in place of the stock one and you see the ride height increases several inches and the tie rods bottom hard against the lower frame rails. One way to get around this is to cut off the stock upper shock mount, fabricate a new one and weld it in place several inches higher on the frame -not a big deal if you are a good welder. I was asked to develop a bolt on upper bracket kit. The design process I used was to first establish the very lowest an a-arm can travel before tie rod contact with the frame. That is, by the way, full lock left and right. Then, knowing the extended length of long travel Fox and Bilstein shocks, I worked up a new upper shock mount that bolts to the existing (no welding required) and provides new upper shock mount point about 2.5” higher than stock. And, it all had to fit under the stock Pilot fenders so they don't have to modified. The upper bracket requires one 13/32” hole be drilled in the stock upper mount for a through bolt – but that's the only frame mod required. You could go back to stock very quickly.
Longer brake lines – not required. Several like a-arm sets kits have been in the field for several years with no brake line changes. The only major design difference in this long travel set up is that these upper brackets will bolt on and those already in use had to have the upper shock mount welded in place.
One other thing:
Tie Rod extending - The process I use to extend tie rods mimics the tie rod sleeving mod Hoser describes on his site. But, I also have to weld a 2” section of tie rod in place before sleeving the tie rods.
I hope this info is helpful.